Semiotic Reading Into Effeminacy Of Donatell’S

Semiotic Reading into Effeminacy of Donatell’s Bronze David

Donatello’s Bronze David was the first freestanding, life-sized nude sculpture since classical times. With regards to the sculpture of earlier Italian Renaissance, its’ effeminacy has stirred continuous inquiry and speculation. Is it effeminate? If yes, to what extent and why? To answer these questions, this essay analyzes this sculpture in terms of two binary oppositions, drawing on semiotics theory. The analysis shows how these two binary oppositions are interrelated and in a broader context how Italian Renaissance was related to the Grecian-Roman culture.

To begin with, it is necessary to clarify the legitimacy behind employing semiotics theory. Basically, semiotics theory derives from structuralism, holding that meaning is a signifying system and is not isolated but “relational and a matter of difference” (Bressler 81). Hence, meaning is found only in the relationship among the various components of the system. For mainstream structuralists, the primary relationship features a series of binary oppositions. “Each binary organizes, values, and then is used to interpret the text” (Bressler 88). Semiotic theory is interested in “how a text conveys meaning rather than what meaning is conveyed” (Bressler 83). Although the theory originated in the field of linguistics, it can be applied to all meaningful cultural phenomena (Bressler 82). It can be used to interpret any culture phenomena as a meaning system in terms of binary oppositions (Baldwin & Longhurst et.al.50).

Within this theoretical framework, this essay deciphers Donatello’s Bronze David revolving around two interrelated binary tensions. One is in sexual dimension - masculinity versus femininity. The other is a political opposition of tyranny versus democracy.

The bronze statue of David first strikes its audience as being effeminate and homoerotic. The subject is a naked, less muscular, beautiful boy “in its combination of sinewy angularity with feminine softness and fullness” (Jason cited in Schneider 215). “With his long hair and broad-brimmed hat”, he “is as beautiful as a girlвЂ¦Ð²Ð‚Ñœ (Johnson 75). He stands in the classical contrapposto with his buttock being plump, wearing the feathered helmet and the crown of leaves. Its effeminate quality is also reflected in the use of an appropriate medium. Bronze is used to produce gleam and a sense of smoothness. Overall, the statue appears effeminate and homoerotic

On the other hand, we are also overwhelmingly impressed with the figure’s masculinity represented by his quick, intelligent prowess and the exuberance of victory. With his left foot wearing boots and a sword in the right hand, he stands triumphantly on Goliath’s decapitated head. David in the statue is typologically a tyrant slayer, a free symbol of Florence, as the inscription engraved on its bases suggests (McHam 32). Such a typological image was unprecedented. In the previous artistic works with David as subject matter, the figure had typologically been “a king, prophet, writer of the Psalme or ancestors of Christ”. Schneider (213) noted the occurrence of iconographic transformation, arguing that the transformation was connected to the changing political atmosphere of the time in Florence. (also see McHam 34)

Politically, the early years of the fifteenth century saw Florence engaging in fights against the threats from neighbor states. By 1402, Florence had fought against Giangaleazzo Visconti of Milan. After the State’s survival from the tyranny’s death, it was invaded by King Ladislaus of Naples in 1414. In 1423, the State suffered from a new threat from Giangaleazzo’s son Filippo Maria Visconti. It is to celebrate the victory of the Florentines over the Milanese in 1428 that the statute was commissioned. (“Early Italian Renaissance student guide” 24; McHam 32).

Donatello Bronze David (photo: the Pygmalion Syndrome Art Gallery)

Why, one might well wonder, should David-a military hero- be portrayed effeminate?

Janson related this mode of representation to Donatello’s own homosexual identity (qtd. in Schneider 215;). Fehl (301) also opposed to linking the statue’s nakedness and effeminacy to the artist’s own sexuality. Although it was well-documented that Donatello himself was sexually attracted to men (Norton website), it does not appear to be a fairly sound justification for the figure’s androgyny or effeminacy, considering the fact that Donatello’s male figures all are not as feminine as the Bronze David (Schneider 215; Fehl 301).

Based on Schneider’s article, this essay attempts to make a new interpretation for the statue’s effeminacy by connecting this aspect to the historical context of early Renaissance period and its early Neo-Platonism. One assumed fact as the premise of the analysis is that Donatello was familiar with Neo-Platonism and antiquity culture due to his contact with Medici and self-study (Schneider 215; Johnson 74).

Donatello lived in a time when Neo-Platonism thrived and became influential among the intellectual circle, thanks to the effort of Marsilio Ficino, the most important Renaissance Neo-Platonist who founded the Academy in Firenze sponsored by Cosimo de Medici (website Renaissance Neo-Platonism). Neo-Platonism emphasized human position as the center of the universe and the mediator between the abstract realm of ideas and the physical world, and highlighted the spiritual union with God. Neo-Platonism encouraged the platonic love between individuals which was regarded as mirror of the spiritual relationship with God. Following this, platonic love justified the legitimacy of love between males and “gave homosexual erotic a new language”. (Richard website) With the rise of humanism and prevalence of Neo-Platonism, Italian Renaissance held a relatively tolerant attitude towards homosexuality. In this contextпјЊit is not surprising to see the homoerotic aspect of Donatell’s David. As Schneider said, “David, as a beautiful boy and at the same time the symbol of a free Florence, can be seen as defending those laws which encourage “Platonic love”. (215)

The concept “platonic love” was not something